scarlet75

I love reading posts by jilted fans stating that the Rangers are one of the worst franchises in sports history. Would that mean that the Philadelphia Phillies are the absolute worst since they have more losses than anyone? How about the Chicago Cubs? Both teams that sell out their buildings on a regular basis without winning much if at all. Stick with hockey you say, sure. How about the Toronto Maple Leafs? When have they last won a cup? But they still bring in tons of fans.

No one is saying the Devils are a bad organization. Lou made them a powerhouse, but the Rangers are still the most valued (or second most behind Toronto, I'm not positive) franchise in the NHL. One of the worst teams in pro sports huh? Be a NYR hater but don't spew stupidity, you make yourself sound dumb.

This is shaping up to be a great series, far from over after 3 games. Stop posting things I'd yell at my kids for and cheer for your team. Win or lose it's always fun to have these two teams face each other in the playoffs. It's a sport for crying out loud, not life.

Could one of you from the crowd supporting the ACLU (or ALCU as the article titles it) please tell me why you're complaining? If you legitimately live in the state of NJ, have a social security number and utility bill or other documentation what is your gripe. They are simply trying to make it that legitimate residents (citizens or not) are able to obtain the 'privilege' of obtaining a driver's license. Driving a vehicle is not a right, it is a privilege you have to earn. You need to take a test and follow the rules of the road. Not all people, age 17 and over have licenses and for good reason. If you're part of the population that has been able to get a license in the past, this shouldn't be so hard. If you pay your taxes, that everyone is so caught up on, you should have a social security number. That's pretty much all they're requiring aside from proof of residence. So please tell me what your complaint is?

UNETHICAL?! You have the right to file for an extension every single year if you wanted to. It has nothing to do with leading by example. Plenty of my friends and family, as well as those I help prepare returns for, don't have all the documents they need on time to file by April 15 all the time. The fact that the Star Ledger is making a big deal about this is laughable. I'll bet you anything a good 10-15% of the employees at the newspaper filed for an extension. It's not uncommon, illegal, or unethical. Check with the IRS, it's 100% legal and acceptable, so long as they get paid.

Nice dialogue, but ERISA in no way oversees guidelines for health insurance. ERISA governs retirement plans and other qualified savings vehicles. I almost listened to your explanation before you made that mistake. I never said conservatives "own" the word marriage, just use some common sense and think about how people have viewed marriage for centuries. Now you want it changed and think everyone should just be okay with it and be accepting of your chosen lifestyle.

I have no problem with it either way, I was just pointing out the obvious based on the hundreds of comments on this board and other media.

I agree that everyone is entitled to rights as a couple regardless of who you choose to be with. However, I find it shocking that people are so shocked that this happened. Everyone knew he would veto it, so why the surprise? Why no anger at all the general populations of very liberal states that voted against legalizing gay marriage?

Everyone deserves equal rights, but when you question the fabric that the vast majority have followed for centuries you don't expect them to push back? As I said earlier, it's all about the word "marriage", not the meaning. If government and all its agencies made sure to recognize civil unions the way they should this would not be an issue, that's the bigger issue. Recognize marriages and unions the same and the issue is removed.

Gay men and women will disagree with me because they want a "marriage" but believe me as someone married for 15 years and having seen a dozen of my friends divorce, you may want to rethink that. Oh, and one of the guys had a gay marriage and they're no longer together so it's not just us straight people.

Not defending his campaign promises. Just pointing out the obvious. He was never for legalizing gay marriage and isn't about to change his mind. Sweeney and Oliver knew he would veto it, they were just playing politics.

I couldn't care less either way, just read all the comments on this board. Sounds a lot like 50/50 for and against. I really think the Dems are making a big mistake. I don't see this losing if put on a referendum and even if it loses it would follow the path of Prop 8 in California. So what do they have to lose, they already lost this battle.

For everyone saying this was a political move by Gov Christie, you must not pay attention. He answered during the debates against Corzine that he was against gay marriage and would not support it. This veto is standing behind his beliefs, just like those of you that are for gay marriage, he is entitled to stand by his beliefs (religious or otherwise) just as you are. If this went to a referendum in November, I for one, believe it would pass handily and then it becomes part of the state constitution where Gov Christie cannot veto it.

This is not a civil rights issue, sorry to disappoint many of you. Men have every right to marry and women have every right to marry, it doesn't even matter what the color of your skin is. That you decide to live your life with someone of the same gender is perfectly fine. The fact that civil unions are not protected as well as they should be is not fair and needs to be addressed, however this issue is more about the term "marriage" than the actual deed. Most everyone I know, conservatives and liberals, don't care who anyone chooses to love and be with and deserve all the benefits and rights associated with it. But calling that union a "marriage" is where the division is.

If this was such an obvious thing to pass, why are there only 6, almost 7, other states that have legalized it? Why hasn't the federal government with Democratic leadership made it the law of the land? The answer is obvious, it's too controversial for the feds and it has failed EVERY public referendum vote EVERY time even in left-leaning states. Fix the civil union rights and give everyone the protections they deserve without offending the religious/moral folks about their view of "marriage".

Why can't Devil fans admit they got the benefit of a call that could have gone either way and be thankful for the win. A strange bounce or good side of a call is part of sports. Of course the Devils feel the call was right and the Rangers feel otherwise, it would be the reverse if the call was on Kovy running into/being pushed into Lundqvist. Devils get 2 points Rangers will get a chance for payback. Thats sports. Arguing over a call won't change it. Next game please.

Fantumgrey, you and everyone else keep missing some key facts. Everyone calling for the right to marry forgets that marriage has been for thousands of years based on two major factors, religion and procreation. Now I don't care what religion people choose to practice and whether or not they choose to have a family. But people need to remember that the United States was founded by religious folks and that's why marriage allows for certain privileges and rights. This isn't about civil rights, it's about the stupidity of laws including IRS code and other fundamental rights all Americans should be entitled to. This is why so many people are against gay marriage. Change the laws from only recognizing marriage as the key to these 'rights' and you eliminate pretty much any argument.

Oh and for the record, I'm all for any of my gay friends and family to be happily married. I'm just pointing out what the law of the land is and how if it were changed to address the times and recognize civil unions as it should, there really wouldn't be an argument. But if two gay people wish to ruin a perfectly good relationship by getting hitched, I'm all for it. Weddings help the economy.

If the 'majority' of people in the US want this, then why has it failed in every state where it has been up for a vote? You can try to say it's all about Gov Christie, and I don't agree with everything the governor stands for, but the truth is your statement is false. When up for public vote, allowing gay marriage has failed every time. Gov Christie doesn't agree with gay marriage, just like many Democrats don't agree with things all Republicans nationwide support, it's his choice. Does it really matter if gay couples are allowed to marry, I couldn't care either way, but your statement is unfounded. Why don't they just cut all the posturing, and have the gay marriage bill up for a vote this November and let the population of New Jersey decide as we should be the ones to make that choice by popular vote. Ends all debate right there.

Yawn, haven't we seen this movie already? Exactly why the BCS, is a joke. Yes, Alabama is arguably the second best team in the country but when you don't even win your own division to make it to the conference championship game, how on earth do you earn the right to play for the national title? If LSU loses on this neutral field and loses by 3 or less, how is Alabama the Natl Champ? The teams will then be 1-1 with LSU winning on the road AT Tuscaloosa.

I for one would rather see a different match-up, we've seen 'bama/LSU already this year haven't we?